Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 64

Thread: Carlin on Voting

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Did nobody here vote for Ron Paul?
    I did.

    Three times in a row.

    Had no qualms about doing so.

    Nor had any this time.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    The Democracy Illusion
    By Butler Shaffer

    July 8, 2013

    One of the more important inquiries into the nature of collective thinking and behavior was Charles Mackay’s 1841 book Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. Focusing on such phenomena as the South Sea Bubble, Alchemy, the Crusades, and the preoccupation with witches, Mackay provided great insight into the nature and energies associated with the herd mindset. Were he around today, Mackay could do an empirically-based treatise on the illusory character of democracy.

    As much of the world watches the Egyptian military forcibly oust from office a democratically-elected President Morsi – who received 51.7% of the vote in last year’s election – even a few editorial writers are beginning to suspect that the concept of “democracy” can no more bestow legitimacy on political rule than does “divine will.” The idea of governments arising through individual desires spontaneously coalescing into a collective structure appeals more to magical thinking than to historic evidence. Were it ever to be shown that all human behavior is genetically-determined – not just influenced but directed – you can be assured that those who want to control others will concoct a “DNA-imperative” for political rule.

    Political systems are invariably grounded in the ambitions of elitist men and women who regard their interests as superior to “ordinary” people – ones they arrogantly dismiss as the “masses” or “Joe Six-Pack.” It is not enough that these elitists endeavor to secure the cooperation of others – an undertaking that is the sine qua non of a market-based social system based on trade –; they insist upon using legalized force to overcome whatever resistance others might have to their schemes. Because the state is defined as a system enjoying a monopoly on the lawful use of violence, those who regard their purposes as superior to those of their neighbors, must concoct a rationale that their victims will accept as a justification for their subject condition.

    It is not enough that those who would rule others have weapons of force to back up their demands: street muggers use guns or knives with which to threaten their intended victims, but enjoy no lingering support following the crime. To create a system that can continue to be used to coerce others into obedience to the elitist demands requires the sanction of the victims; their belief that being forced to obey the dictates of others is justified by some transcendent principle. In religiously-based societies, the legitimacy of the state was explained in terms of “divine will.” During the Scientific Age, so-called “natural law” principles were invoked; while the Industrial Revolution, with its emphasis on relations based on contracts, made it easier for people to accept a “social contract” theory of political systems.

    Marx’s “dialectical materialism,” Bentham’s and Mill’s cases for “utilitarianism,” or other rationales for governments, illustrate the need for the politically-minded to justify their rule by principles that go beyond the simple-minded notion “I want what I want when I want it.” Those to be ruled must become convinced that the system to which they will be subject serves –or is justified by – some principle that transcends that of the common mugger.

    That none of these theories of the state do, in fact, serve their expressed purpose is of no consequence, as long as the ruled believe that they do. What God could be so perverse as to sanction tyrannical, butcherous regimes that paraded under the banner “divine will?” To those who argue that governments violate “natural law” principles, my response has been: how can anything that exists – particularly as temporally and spatially ubiquitous as state systems – be considered unnatural? Nor will I ever forget my jurisprudence professor, Karl Llewellyn, answering a fellow-student’s argument “what about the greatest good for the greatest number?”, with the question “what about the greatest good for the greatest guy?”

    It always comes down to this: ideas are abstractions and, as such, are always subject to interpretation. The interpretations are, themselves, expressed in additional abstractions (words) that also require interpretation. This is the underlying cause of the failure of written constitutions to limit the exercise of power, and why those who argue “we must get back to the Constitution” fail to recognize that we never left it; the same words are still there! What words could more beg being interpreted than “general welfare,” “common defense,” “justice,” “reasonable” and “unreasonable,” “due process of law,” “excessive,” etc.? When constitutional cases inform us that “slaves” and “Indians” are not “persons” entitled to protection, but “corporations” are, it is evident that the underlying problem, here, has to do with interpreting the meanings of such words. The state not only enjoys a monopoly on the use of violence, it is also allowed – through powers of judicial review that are nowhere provided for in the Constitution – to interpret both the range of its powers, and the limitations thereon. It should come as no surprise to anyone paying close attention, that the state has provided itself with an ever-expanding definition of its powers, and an ever-diminishing realm of individual liberties.

    This political racket has been made possible through decades of conditioning by government schools, the media, and other institutional interests, a belief in the proposition that “we” are the government; that politicians and government officials are our agents, with ourselves as principals. I suggest to people a simple way to test this notion: call up the Post Office and tell them to start making Sunday deliveries. You will quickly discover just who “the people” are who comprise “we the people,” and also learn that you are not included in the group running the machinery of the state.

    “Democracy is a system in which four wolves and a sheep decide what to have for dinner.” This provides as vivid a picture as any of what underlies this rationale for collective force. But it is not a collective mindset that creates the democratic urge. The relatively small group of elitists who desire to have coercive control over the rest of mankind have employed the concept of democracy as a way of mobilizing “dark side” forces; to get people to lose their sense of individual purpose, direction, and responsibility in a collective identity (e.g., nation-state) which the elitists – using primarily schools and the media – then manipulate to serve their interests, not those of humanity in general. The common mistake most of us make is assuming that a collective impulse from ordinary people generates a demand for the creation of a democratic political system. The distinction between the drafting of The Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution is instructive: the former was, in the words of Frank Chodorov, “not at all the charter of a new nation. It is a rationalization of rebellion.” The latter – produced eleven years later – was the creation of a power structure that exploited the sentiments for liberty in order to serve the interests of those with ambitions of authority over others.
    As long as people embrace the illusion of democracy, they will be inclined to obey the dictates of those who control the machinery of the state. They are inclined to regard their obedience to a given mandate as only a short-term problem that can be overcome by “working within the system” to effect change. But such an attitude ignores the mechanisms in place that prevent any popular change that is contrary to the interests of the elitists. The early case of Marbury v. Madison allowed for a usurpation of authority for the Supreme Court to pass on the constitutionality of the actions of other branches of government, a power that is nowhere spelled out – or even hinted at – in the Constitution. It would probably have been fatal to ratification efforts if the Constitution had expressly provided the judicial branch with such powers.

    Such an arrogation of authority has provided a barrier to efforts by ordinary people to direct the political system to ends they might value, purposes that would be contrary to elitist interests. Thus, if a majority of voters in a given state vote in favor of a referendum measure (e.g., to allow for medical use of marijuana), the courts have no difficulty in striking down such legislation as “unconstitutional.” The interests of the elitist owners of the system must prevail over the preferences of the majority!

    The Egyptian people are now experiencing the fallacy of a democratically controlled political system. A man who, just one year ago, was elected president of that country by a majority of the voters, has been removed from office and held prisoner by military force. And, to make clear that any “social contract” illusions about the legitimacy of the state do not prevail in Egypt, the military has also suspended the constitution, embracing the same sentiments as former president George W. Bush who declared the U.S. Constitution to be “just a goddamned piece of paper!”

    The belief that what C. Wright Mills called “the power elite” would ever be so careless or witless as to allow tens of millions of subject people to have any real control over the machinery or purposes of the state, is refuted in what passes for daily news. The treatment accorded Ron Paul in his popularly-supported efforts to make fundamental reforms in the American political system, demonstrates how desperately the elitists – along with their well-trained political and media lapdogs and toadies – insist on keeping political power where it belongs: in their hands.

    The 1999 film, Election, centered on a high-school campaign for student body president, illustrates the fallacy of voter-based elections determining outcomes. In the midst of the campaign for votes between the campus butterfly and the football hero, another student – a nonconformist who sees the meaningless of what is transpiring – enters herself as a candidate. Her campaign speech at a school assembly follows that of the other two. The honesty of her words so resonates with the entire student body, that school administrators hurriedly gather and remove her name from the ballots!



    Emma Goldman got it right!
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/...racy-illusion/

    Or, vote hard. Just don't delude yourself into believing it'll change even the tiniest thing.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    Only a few more days until voting day!!!

    You should share with us pics of your collection of I voted Today stickers. It's probably pretty impressive.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    I did. (Technically, I caucused for him - but to-may-to, to-mah-to.)

    And FTR, I have no problems with voting per se. Personal psychic satisfaction and the social function of "in-group signaling" are two perfectly acceptable reasons for voting.

    I also reject claims that voting is somehow a NAP-violating "act of aggression."

    What I do have a problem with is the idea that voting is actually going to be an effective cause in changing anything (and that you are therefore some kind of scoundrel if you don't vote or discourage others from doing so).

    Voting is epilogue. At best, the outcomes of elections - i.e., the results of voting - are always the effects of substantive changes (if any), and never the causes of them.

    Those for whom voting is the crux of substantive change are putting the cart before the horse. They are basing their hopes and efforts on after-the-fact ephemera.

    In short: changes (if any) do not occur due to election results - election results (if any) occur due to changes.

    Those who disagree are invited to dispute the issue with Samuel Adams and some guys who were at the Old North Bridge in Concord - or with Martin Luther, or Charles Darwin, or Mahatma Gandhi, or Adolf Hitler, or Jesus of Nazareth, or Lao Tzu. or [et alii] ...



    If the doom of Western Civilization really has come to hinge upon people putting into boxes pieces of paper that have been marked up one particular way (but not some other particular way), then WC is indeed well and truly screwed ... (and if it has allowed itself to fall to such low estate, then it has become so weak and worthless that it must be deemed unsalvageable, regardless of the outcome of any election ...)
    O rlly? The consequence of voting is the creation(or continuation, depending on context) of a coercive and NAP-violating regime. Violating the NAP by proxy is still a violation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    I did.

    Three times in a row.

    Had no qualms about doing so.

    Nor had any this time.
    ^^^ what he said ^^^
    Disclaimer: any post made after midnight and before 8AM is made before the coffee dip stick has come up to optomim level - expect some level of silliness,

    The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are out numbered by those who vote for a living !!!!!!!

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    You should share with us pics of your collection of I voted Today stickers. It's probably pretty impressive.
    It's hard to take good photographs of them. The room I keep them in is very dark and of course I would never use flash photography on something so fragile.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    O rlly?
    rlly

    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    The consequence of voting is [...]
    As I argued in my previous post, voting (as manifested in the outcomes of elections) is itself a consequent, not an antecedent.

    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    [...] the creation (or continuation, depending on context) of a coercive and NAP-violating regime. Violating the NAP by proxy is still a violation.
    Voting does not create or continue anything. At most, voting is just an endorsement of (or expression of a wish for) something.

    And endorsements of (or expressions of wishes for) NAP violations are not themselves NAP violations.

    Killing you may be a NAP violation, but merely saying "I wish you were dead" is not.

    Likewise, merely sticking a marked-up piece of paper into a box is not a NAP violation - "by proxy" (whatever that means) or otherwise.

    Denials of this are tantamount to saying that any expression of disagreement with (or opposition to) the NAP can justifiably be responded to with violence (because such expressions are "NAP violations"). IOW: The claim that voting is a NAP-violating "act of aggression" necessarily implies that it is justified to use violence against anyone who votes (or otherwise expresses any non-libertarian thoughts or sentiments), merely because they voted (or said something contrary to the NAP). This is clearly nonsense. The NAP justifies no such thing. Thus, by reductio ad absurdum, the claim that voting is a NAP-violating "act of aggression" is false.

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    rlly



    As I argued in my previous post, voting (as manifested in the outcomes of elections) is itself a consequent, not an antecedent.



    Voting does not create or continue anything. At most, voting is just an endorsement of (or expression of a wish for) something.

    And endorsements of (or expressions of wishes for) NAP violations are not themselves NAP violations.

    Killing you may be a NAP violation, but merely saying "I wish you were dead" is not.
    Merely saying something has no legal weight or consequence like voting does.

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Likewise, merely sticking a marked-up piece of paper into a box is not a NAP violation - "by proxy" (whatever that means) or otherwise.
    Except it's not just *any* box. It's a ballot box. I don't have to wait for the goons in office to act to know that what got them there was bad for me. Likewise, I don't have to wait till an executioner's bullet strikes me to know that nothing about being shot is good for me.


    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Denials of this are tantamount to saying that any expression of disagreement with (or opposition to) the NAP can justifiably be responded to with violence (because such expressions are "NAP violations"). IOW: The claim that voting is a NAP-violating "act of aggression" necessarily implies that it is justified to use violence against anyone who votes (or otherwise expresses any non-libertarian thoughts or sentiments), merely because they voted (or said something contrary to the NAP). This is clearly nonsense. The NAP justifies no such thing. Thus, by reductio ad absurdum, the claim that voting is a NAP-violating "act of aggression" is false.
    The only non-NAP violating form of voting is what I do-writing in imaginary candidates.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    It's hard to take good photographs of them. The room I keep them in is very dark and of course I would never use flash photography on something so fragile.
    Okay. try a flatbed scanner.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  12. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Okay. try a flatbed scanner.
    Are you joking? I can't tell if you're joking. There's no way I'd expose my collection to that much light.

    Every time a piece of fine art is exposed to light, the pigment fades a little. It's why fine art like an original Monet or a 1960 Chicago button would never be on permanent display. And they'd certainly never put it through a $#@!ing scanner.

    I did however capture this image many years ago, when I inherited it from my grandfather:



    I keep it separate from the rest of my collection, in a safe deposit box that only I know about.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    Are you joking? I can't tell if you're joking. There's no way I'd expose my collection to that much light.

    Every time a piece of fine art is exposed to light, the pigment fades a little. It's why fine art like an original Monet or a 1960 Chicago button would never be on permanent display. And they'd certainly never put it through a $#@!ing scanner.

    I did however capture this image many years ago, when I inherited it from my grandfather:



    I keep it separate from the rest of my collection, in a safe deposit box that only I know about.
    The stock stickers are printed on isn't photo-sensitive, tho. In fact, it's designed to be durable enough to take lots of exposure to elements and wear. That Lincoln image is printed on a much frailer stock.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    The stock stickers are printed on isn't photo-sensitive
    So you're an expert now on the pigmentation used in voting stickers that were printed in the 1980's? And campaign stickers that were printed in the 1920's?

    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his

  16. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    So you're an expert now on the pigmentation used in voting stickers that were printed in the 1980's? And campaign stickers that were printed in the 1920's?

    80's, yes. My prepress teacher was an active printer at that time. I know a little less about 1920s. Early 20th century presses are pretty cool looking. Highly recommend you check one out at a museum if you can, cuz the modern machines have a totally different look and feel.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  17. #44
    Vote early and vote often!


  18. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Vote early and vote often!

    You're a great American zippy!

    Good luck on election day tomorrow, may your votes bear many victories
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his

  19. #46
    This week's election - like every one in modern times - is being touted as a "critical" vote, or even the vote of a lifetime. But this is just propaganda from partisan hacks in both major parties. On today's Good Morning Liberty, Michael Boldin covers James Madison's advice on how to deal with the federal government. The "Father of the Constitution" recommended 4 steps, and not one of them included "voting the bums out."

    ''There were four million people in the American Colonies and we had Jefferson and Franklin. Now we have over 300 million and the two top guys are Trump and Biden. What can you draw from this? Darwin was wrong.'' ~ Mort Sahl

  20. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Carlin was a member of the club, they LOVE people who don't vote.
    Carlin wasn't a member of any club, except the go piss up a rope and stop bothering me club. He didn't appreciate the problem (democracy), or see the solution (non-democratic government), but he did lock the right people in portable toilets and set them on fire.

  21. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Carlin wasn't a member of any club, except the go piss up a rope and stop bothering me club. He didn't appreciate the problem (democracy), or see the solution (non-democratic government), but he did lock the right people in portable toilets and set them on fire.
    He was a wolf in sheep's clothing, he would never have received the fame he had if he wasn't.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    He was a wolf in sheep's clothing, he would never have received the fame he had if he wasn't.
    Always conspiratorial thinking with you.

  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Always conspiratorial thinking with you.
    And always party line thinking with you.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  25. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And always party line thinking with you.
    Which party is that?

  26. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Which party is that?
    Globalist.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  27. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Marenco View Post
    This week's election - like every one in modern times - is being touted as a "critical" vote, or even the vote of a lifetime. But this is just propaganda from partisan hacks in both major parties. On today's Good Morning Liberty, Michael Boldin covers James Madison's advice on how to deal with the federal government. The "Father of the Constitution" recommended 4 steps, and not one of them included "voting the bums out."

    "The Patriarch"

  28. #54
    I miss George
    Disclaimer: any post made after midnight and before 8AM is made before the coffee dip stick has come up to optomim level - expect some level of silliness,

    The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are out numbered by those who vote for a living !!!!!!!

  29. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by opal View Post
    I miss George
    Me too- he was great at using comedy to tell it like it was.
    There is no spoon.

  30. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    He was a wolf in sheep's clothing, he would never have received the fame he had if he wasn't.
    Are you talking about Trump?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Are you talking about Trump?

    You know, I have no problem believing in conspiracies that have a decent amount of ehard evidence to support them, but with this guy? Conspiracies everywhere. A "communist" under every bed.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  33. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    You know, I have no problem believing in conspiracies that have a decent amount of ehard evidence to support them, but with this guy? Conspiracies everywhere. A "communist" under every bed.
    Especially if they don't march lock-step with his POV.
    There is no spoon.

  34. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Ender View Post
    Especially if they don't march lock-step with his POV.

    Those are the WORST "communists!"
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  35. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    You know, I have no problem believing in conspiracies that have a decent amount of ehard evidence to support them, but with this guy? Conspiracies everywhere. A "communist" under every bed.
    No, he doesn't see conspiracies everywhere. In his world, Carlin, who began in the 1960s and took over a decade to get around to lampooning politics, couldn't get publicity without being a certified tool, but Trump got a damned sight more publicity (24/7 during the primaries) yet isn't a tool.

    No, he's mighty selective when it comes to his many conspiracies. In his world, Trump could never have done what he did without being a 'wolf in sheep's clothing', yet could not possibly be a wolf in sheep's clothing.

    I just want to know what conspiracy grants him, and him alone, the power to insult anyone and everyone with impugnity.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 11-06-2018 at 11:09 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    We believe our lying eyes...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. The Best of George Carlin
    By DamianTV in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-27-2013, 02:32 AM
  2. George Carlin - Voting
    By PeacePlan in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-29-2008, 09:01 PM
  3. George Carlin on why I am voting for Ron Paul (Not an Endorsement)
    By jumpyg1258 in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-02-2008, 11:55 AM
  4. George Carlin and Ron Paul
    By noztnac in forum Success Strategies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-02-2007, 04:53 AM
  5. voting for Ron and Carlin Ron paul
    By Man from La Mancha in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-2007, 04:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •